I grew up learning to think 'logically' and it hangs around to this day.
If I go to the store to buy some lumber I might select a 2X4, maybe a 1X2 for trim, or some 2X6 to build a deck. We all look for lumber in label sizes that way. It might be a 2X4 that will be viewed vertically as it is used for a beam, or a 2X6 and it lays in a horizontal position for a deck. To ME that is just normal thinking and description, unless there are additional words to describe something other than just numeric measurements.
So, to me, most search coils that are not round would be labeled the same way with the smaller number [size=small](width usually)[/size] first and the larger measurement [size=small](usually the length)[/size] listed second. Examples would be the Garrett 5X8, 6.[size=small]5[/size]X9, 8.[size=small]5[/size]X11 or 9X12. White's uses 4X6, 6X10 and 8X14. To me that's normal, but back when, somebody thought a nifty marketing idea would be to do things backwards. I have always called the Tesoro 8X9 coil an 8X9, and not a 9X8 like they do. I have quite a stable of primary-use detectors with elliptical DD coils, mainly Nokta and Makro brands, but I call them the way I think is normal, but the manufacturer uses 7.[size=small]5[/size]X4, 10X5.[size=small]5[/size] or 11X7.
Common round-shaped coils used to be named pretty much their actual physical diameter with a few exceptions. One is the older White's Blue Max 600 which was in a housing that actually measured 6½". They have used that same housing and had/have coils labeled 5.3 Black Max, 5.3 Bullseye and 5.3 Eclipse. I know many people who wouldn't order a dinky coil, think they were just slightly lager than 5" diameter, but the coil housing is the same 6½" diameter coil. So, why the Five-point-Three? Marketing!
Someone more concerned with using a cute marketing name to be catchy, and probably not knowing much about metal detecting and how most consumers picture a search coil to be able to fit into spaces yet still have adequate coverage, had that bright idea. It was, and is, a bad idea because many people think of the first number and still imagine a much smaller coil. So, how did they decide to use the name 5.3? Good question so I asked several folks on a few visits to the White's factory and I was told that it was decided to use that term because that was the physical size of the outside Transmit winding, not the physical coil housing.
I told folks that it was a poor idea because most detector users don't think that way, and most wouldn't have clue as to how a search coils works or the internal windings in the first place. They think in terms of size of a coil for fits a site to be hunted. Then I confirmed that what they told me was correct, that the 5.3 was referring to the size of the internal Transmit wining in those Concentric coils.
Once they said yes, I asked three different engineers and a former CEO a question and none of them could give me a correct answer without checking further. The question was this:
"If 5.3" is the measurement of the outside Transmit winding in these coils, is that 5.3" from the inside of the loop to the inside of the loop, or from the outside of the loop to the outside of the loop, or was that a measurement from the center of the Transmit winding across to the center of the Transmit winding?"
Engineers and CEO didn't know, unless they went and measured, so I know the marketing folks had no clue, and darn tootin' the end consumer doesn't really know, either. So I am left to guess that the 'marketing' idea was catchy with the Tesoro folks because any ruler or tape measure shows the 5.75 Tesoro coils to measure almost right on 6" diameter ... and that's what I call them.
So I have a 6" round Concentric on my Bandido II [size=small]micro[/size]MAX and Silver Sabre [size=small]micro[/size]MAX units, I have a 6" Concentric ordered for the Vaquero, and until it gets here and mounted I just keep the 8X11 DD affixed to the working end. I call them they way I think they should be called.
My opinions,
Monte
If I go to the store to buy some lumber I might select a 2X4, maybe a 1X2 for trim, or some 2X6 to build a deck. We all look for lumber in label sizes that way. It might be a 2X4 that will be viewed vertically as it is used for a beam, or a 2X6 and it lays in a horizontal position for a deck. To ME that is just normal thinking and description, unless there are additional words to describe something other than just numeric measurements.
So, to me, most search coils that are not round would be labeled the same way with the smaller number [size=small](width usually)[/size] first and the larger measurement [size=small](usually the length)[/size] listed second. Examples would be the Garrett 5X8, 6.[size=small]5[/size]X9, 8.[size=small]5[/size]X11 or 9X12. White's uses 4X6, 6X10 and 8X14. To me that's normal, but back when, somebody thought a nifty marketing idea would be to do things backwards. I have always called the Tesoro 8X9 coil an 8X9, and not a 9X8 like they do. I have quite a stable of primary-use detectors with elliptical DD coils, mainly Nokta and Makro brands, but I call them the way I think is normal, but the manufacturer uses 7.[size=small]5[/size]X4, 10X5.[size=small]5[/size] or 11X7.
Common round-shaped coils used to be named pretty much their actual physical diameter with a few exceptions. One is the older White's Blue Max 600 which was in a housing that actually measured 6½". They have used that same housing and had/have coils labeled 5.3 Black Max, 5.3 Bullseye and 5.3 Eclipse. I know many people who wouldn't order a dinky coil, think they were just slightly lager than 5" diameter, but the coil housing is the same 6½" diameter coil. So, why the Five-point-Three? Marketing!
Someone more concerned with using a cute marketing name to be catchy, and probably not knowing much about metal detecting and how most consumers picture a search coil to be able to fit into spaces yet still have adequate coverage, had that bright idea. It was, and is, a bad idea because many people think of the first number and still imagine a much smaller coil. So, how did they decide to use the name 5.3? Good question so I asked several folks on a few visits to the White's factory and I was told that it was decided to use that term because that was the physical size of the outside Transmit winding, not the physical coil housing.
I told folks that it was a poor idea because most detector users don't think that way, and most wouldn't have clue as to how a search coils works or the internal windings in the first place. They think in terms of size of a coil for fits a site to be hunted. Then I confirmed that what they told me was correct, that the 5.3 was referring to the size of the internal Transmit wining in those Concentric coils.
Once they said yes, I asked three different engineers and a former CEO a question and none of them could give me a correct answer without checking further. The question was this:
"If 5.3" is the measurement of the outside Transmit winding in these coils, is that 5.3" from the inside of the loop to the inside of the loop, or from the outside of the loop to the outside of the loop, or was that a measurement from the center of the Transmit winding across to the center of the Transmit winding?"
Engineers and CEO didn't know, unless they went and measured, so I know the marketing folks had no clue, and darn tootin' the end consumer doesn't really know, either. So I am left to guess that the 'marketing' idea was catchy with the Tesoro folks because any ruler or tape measure shows the 5.75 Tesoro coils to measure almost right on 6" diameter ... and that's what I call them.
So I have a 6" round Concentric on my Bandido II [size=small]micro[/size]MAX and Silver Sabre [size=small]micro[/size]MAX units, I have a 6" Concentric ordered for the Vaquero, and until it gets here and mounted I just keep the 8X11 DD affixed to the working end. I call them they way I think they should be called.
My opinions,
Monte